[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Re: [CHRPM]

From: David Woolley
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Re: [CHRPM]
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:16:10 +0000 (GMT)

> Openssl comes with the Cygwin operating system and is probably OK
> under the GPL. Wget, whose copyright is held by the FSF, recently

What's being argued here is that it is a "normal part of the
operating system", and therefore could even be fully closed source.
But the implication is that, in any situation where it is not 
supplied with the OS, it cannot be supplied with Lynx.

> for all platforms. This probably isn't possible with lynx, since
> the copyright isn't held by any one entity. Similarly, there is
> no one other than a copyright owner who can enforce the GPL. See
> "";

This inability to effectively enforce the licence or vary it is why
the FSF wanted to insist on a single copryright owner for Lynx before
distributing it from their site.  The current copyright ownership 
status for Lynx means its impossible to make exceptions to the licence,
e.g. to invoke the rule that allows versions to be restricted from
distribution to countries where there is a patent conflict.

I have a horrible feeling that is is not even possible to establish
who has copyrights on what in Lynx.

> Since the openssl license is not technically compatible with GPL,

That's a serious problem for Lynx.

> and since the openssl developers have no intention of changing their
> license, I believe it would be reasonable to act in accord with what
> you think the intent of the lynx developers would be in this regard.

I think that the FSF would take a dim view of this, as the whole basis
of enforcement of the GPL is to make people fear legal action if they
breach the rules; they wouldn't want precedents for "I thought he wouldn't
object" arguments.

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]